Barack Obama’s speech as delivered

Text Size

Obama address nation on debt

POLITICO 44

Good evening. Tonight, I want to talk about the debate we’ve been having in Washington over the national debt — a debate that directly affects the lives of all Americans.

For the last decade, we’ve spent more money than we take in. In the year 2000, the government had a budget surplus. But instead of using it to pay off our debt, the money was spent on trillions of dollars in new tax cuts, while two wars and an expensive prescription drug program were simply added to our nation’s credit card.

As a result, the deficit was on track to top $1 trillion the year I took office. To make matters worse, the recession meant that there was less money coming in, and it required us to spend even more -– on tax cuts for middle-class families to spur the economy; on unemployment insurance; on aid to states so we could prevent more teachers and firefighters and police officers from being laid off. These emergency steps also added to the deficit.

Now, every family knows that a little credit card debt is manageable. But if we stayon the current path, our growing debt could cost us jobs and do serious damage to the economy. More of our tax dollars will go toward paying off the interest on our loans. Businesses will be less likely to open up shop and hire workers in a country that can’t balance its books. Interest rates could climb for everyone who borrows money -– the homeowner with a mortgage, the student with a college loan, the corner store that wants to expand. And we won’t have enough money to make job-creating investments in things like education and infrastructure, or pay for vital programs like Medicare and Medicaid.

Because neither party is blameless for the decisions that led to this problem, both parties have a responsibility to solve it. And over the last several months, that’s what we’ve been trying to do. I won’t bore you with the details of every plan or proposal, but basically, the debate has centered around two different approaches.

The first approach says, let’s live within our means by making serious, historic cuts in government spending. Let’s cut domestic spending to the lowest level it’s been since Dwight Eisenhower was President. Let’s cut defense spending at the Pentagon by hundreds of billions of dollars. Let’s cut out waste and fraud in health care programs like Medicare — and at the same time, let’s make modest adjustments so that Medicare is still there for future generations. Finally, let’s ask the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations to give up some of their breaks in the tax code and special deductions.

This balanced approach asks everyone to give a little without requiring anyone to sacrifice too much. It would reduce the deficit by around $4 trillion and put us on a path to pay down our debt. And the cuts wouldn’t happen so abruptly that they’d be a drag on our economy, or prevent us from helping small businesses and middle-class families get back on their feet right now.

This approach is also bipartisan. While many in my own party aren’t happy with the painful cuts it makes, enough will be willing to accept them if the burden is fairly shared. While Republicans might like to see deeper cuts and no revenue at all, there are many in the Senate who have said, “Yes, I’m willing to put politics aside and consider this approach because I care about solving the problem.” And to his credit, this is the kind of approach the Republican Speaker of the House, John Boehner, was working on with me over the last several weeks.

The only reason this balanced approach isn’t on its way to becoming law right now is because a significant number of Republicans in Congress are insisting on a different approach — a cuts-only approach -– an approach that doesn’t ask the wealthiest Americans or biggest corporations to contribute anything at all. And because nothing is asked of those at the top of the income scale, such an approach would close the deficit only with more severe cuts to programs we all care about –- cuts that place a greater burden on working families.

So the debate right now isn’t about whether we need to make tough choices. Democrats and Republicans agree on the amount of deficit reduction we need. The debate is about how it should be done. Most Americans, regardless of political party, don’t understand how we can ask a senior citizen to pay more for her Medicare before we ask a corporate jet owner or the oil companies to give up tax breaks that other companies don’t get. How can we ask a student to pay more for college before we ask hedge fund managers to stop paying taxes at a lower rate than their secretaries? How can we slash funding for education and clean energy before we ask people like me to give up tax breaks we don’t need and didn’t ask for?

That’s not right. It’s not fair. We all want a government that lives within its means, but there are still things we need to pay for as a country -– things like new roads and bridges; weather satellites and food inspection; services to veterans and medical research.

And keep in mind that under a balanced approach, the 98 percent of Americans who make under $250,000 would see no tax increases at all. None. In fact, I want to extend the payroll tax cut for working families. What we’re talking about under a balanced approach is asking Americans whose incomes have gone up the most over the last decade -– millionaires and billionaires -– to share in the sacrifice everyone else has to make. And I think these patriotic Americans are willing to pitch in. In fact, over the last few decades, they’ve pitched in every time we passed a bipartisan deal to reduce the deficit. The first time a deal was passed, a predecessor of mine made the case for a balanced approach by saying this:

“Would you rather reduce deficits and interest rates by raising revenue from those who are not now paying their fair share, or would you rather accept larger budget deficits, higher interest rates, and higher unemployment? And I think I know your answer.”

Those words were spoken by Ronald Reagan. But today, many Republicans in the House refuse to consider this kind of balanced approach -– an approach that was pursued not only by President Reagan, but by the first President Bush, by President Clinton, by myself, and by many Democrats and Republicans in the United States Senate. So we’re left with a stalemate.

Now, what makes today’s stalemate so dangerous is that it has been tied to something known as the debt ceiling -– a term that most people outside of Washington have probably never heard of before.

Understand –- raising the debt ceiling does not allow Congress to spend more money. It simply gives our country the ability to pay the bills that Congress has already racked up. In the past, raising the debt ceiling was routine. Since the 1950s, Congress has always passed it, and every President has signed it. President Reagan did it 18 times. George W. Bush did it seven times. And we have to do it by next Tuesday, August 2nd, or else we won’t be able to pay all of our bills.

Unfortunately, for the past several weeks, Republican House members have essentially said that the only way they’ll vote to prevent America’s first-ever default is if the rest of us agree to their deep, spending cuts-only approach.

If that happens, and we default, we would not have enough money to pay all of our bills -– bills that include monthly Social Security checks, veterans’ benefits, and the government contracts we’ve signed with thousands of businesses.

For the first time in history, our country’s AAA credit rating would be downgraded, leaving investors around the world to wonder whether the United States is still a good bet. Interest rates would skyrocket on credit cards, on mortgages and on car loans, which amounts to a huge tax hike on the American people. We would risk sparking a deep economic crisis -– this one caused almost entirely by Washington.

So defaulting on our obligations is a reckless and irresponsible outcome to this debate. And Republican leaders say that they agree we must avoid default. But the new approach that Speaker Boehner unveiled today, which would temporarily extend the debt ceiling in exchange for spending cuts, would force us to once again face the threat of default just six months from now. In other words, it doesn’t solve the problem.

First of all, a six-month extension of the debt ceiling might not be enough to avoid a credit downgrade and the higher interest rates that all Americans would have to pay as a result. We know what we have to do to reduce our deficits; there’s no point in putting the economy at risk by kicking the can further down the road.

But there’s an even greater danger to this approach. Based on what we’ve seen these past few weeks, we know what to expect six months from now. The House of Representatives will once again refuse to prevent default unless the rest of us accept their cuts-only approach. Again, they will refuse to ask the wealthiest Americans to give up their tax cuts or deductions. Again, they will demand harsh cuts to programs like Medicare. And once again, the economy will be held captive unless they get their way.

This is no way to run the greatest country on Earth. It’s a dangerous game that we’ve never played before, and we can’t afford to play it now. Not when the jobs and livelihoods of so many families are at stake. We can’t allow the American people to become collateral damage to Washington’s political warfare.

Congress now has one week left to act, and there are still paths forward. The Senate has introduced a plan to avoid default, which makes a down payment on deficit reduction and ensures that we don’t have to go through this again in six months.

I think that’s a much better approach, although serious deficit reduction would still require us to tackle the tough challenges of entitlement and tax reform. Either way, I’ve told leaders of both parties that they must come up with a fair compromise in the next few days that can pass both houses of Congress -– and a compromise that I can sign. I’m confident we can reach this compromise. Despite our disagreements, Republican leaders and I have found common ground before. And I believe that enough members of both parties will ultimately put politics aside and help us make progress.

Now, I realize that a lot of the new members of Congress and I don’t see eye-to-eye on many issues. But we were each elected by some of the same Americans for some of the same reasons. Yes, many want government to start living within its means. And many are fed up with a system in which the deck seems stacked against middle-class Americans in favor of the wealthiest few. But do you know what people are fed up with most of all?

They’re fed up with a town where compromise has become a dirty word. They work all day long, many of them scraping by, just to put food on the table. And when these Americans come home at night, bone-tired, and turn on the news, all they see is the same partisan three-ring circus here in Washington. They see leaders who can’t seem to come together and do what it takes to make life just a little bit better for ordinary Americans. They’re offended by that. And they should be.

The American people may have voted for divided government, but they didn’t vote for a dysfunctional government. So I’m asking you all to make your voice heard. If you want a balanced approach to reducing the deficit, let your member of Congress know. If you believe we can solve this problem through compromise, send that message.

America, after all, has always been a grand experiment in compromise. As a democracy made up of every race and religion, where every belief and point of view is welcomed, we have put to the test time and again the proposition at the heart of our founding: that out of many, we are one. We’ve engaged in fierce and passionate debates about the issues of the day, but from slavery to war, from civil liberties to questions of economic justice, we have tried to live by the words that Jefferson once wrote: “Every man cannot have his way in all things — without this mutual disposition, we are disjointed individuals, but not a society.”

History is scattered with the stories of those who held fast to rigid ideologies and refused to listen to those who disagreed. But those are not the Americans we remember. We remember the Americans who put country above self, and set personal grievances aside for the greater good. We remember the Americans who held this country together during its most difficult hours; who put aside pride and party to form a more perfect union.

That’s who we remember. That’s who we need to be right now. The entire world is watching. So let’s seize this moment to show why the United States of America is still the greatest nation on Earth –- not just because we can still keep our word and meet our obligations, but because we can still come together as one nation.

Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America.

Delivery and packaging are what sells. The problem is that MOST Americans don't have the necessary drive to to make a change either way. They think that commenting makes a difference. We all know that it remains the same.

OMG! What a hack of a president! Goes to the year 2000 tp blame bush again????? Scare this granny again? Play the class warfare ****e? What a pathetic little man!!! When does he own up to the 5 trillion dollars he has spent that we didn't have?

I am very insulted by this president saying that I probably never heard of the debt ceiling. Mr. President, Doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different result each time is the definition of insanity.....Albert Einstein. And that's exactly what you've done. Each time the congress has presented a plan you've said "no" - - even the Senate's plan you've said no to.

I am so tired of the class warfare and scare tactics you Mr. President constantly pushed down our throats - - are the rich and the private sector entirely to blame for everything that’s happened? Personally I think not, look at what Fanny and Freddy did to not only our country but the entire world with the bad dept in real estate - - that was your party who put us in this situation. That wasn’t the private sector - - that was government. Oh, and by the way here are some facts for you and anyone who wants to can look up: The income tax burden is shouldered by a small group of the very richest Americans. The wealthiest 1% of the population earning 19% of the income pays 37% of the income tax. The top 10% pay 68% of the tab! Meanwhile the bottom 50% of the population (those below the median income level) pays just 3% of the taxes!

I am sick and tired of your "no" "no" "no"!!!! You're the one who can't work with anyone. And I'm sick and tired of your spend, spend, spend. Start cutting I think the CC&B is a good plan, I do it everyday why can't you?

Just listened to the Obama campaign speech. The truth is that millions will die of old age before the Senate plan would actually make serious cuts. We know that such cuts are in Never Never Land. They are eliminated when the public is distracted, and has forgotten the promises. Unfortunately Boehner's plan, cuts by committee, simply puts off actually addressing the overspending. "Tomorrow, tomorrow, I love you tomorrow, you're always a day away."

The House has passes two balanced, realistic plans, both of which would actually address the problem.

The truth is that Obama will not accept any reduction in his 25% increase in descretionary spending at any time, while he is in office. He has not compromised an inch.

“This Is No time for Games” by Peggy Noonan (review, July 16) Ms. Noonan attempts to make the case that Americans are nostalgic for old America; a time when people were nice to each other and we felt safe. I agree it is helpful to reflect on inspirational communicators like Kennedy, Reagan and Clinton, as they spoke directly to us about their personal vision for America’s future. What Ms. Noonan doesn’t understand is that Independent voters have been patiently sitting in silence for too long and we are tired of the old political games that continually take America to the brink of crisis. Our democracy was created on set of principles that require compromise. Term limits, balanced budget amendments and assigning commissions to make tough decisions only serve as “side-tracks.” Former Senator, Chuck Hagel was right-on when he said, elected officials must come to Washington to “govern, find solutions, and solve problems.” Unfortunately, we have elected officials who only have one goal in mind - retain power and get re-elected. Ms. Noonan, not all voters want to go back in time to the 1970’s. The rigorous Monday-Thursday work schedule is the excuse pundits use to justify why congress is so dysfunctional. I believe America is engaged in a USA “spring” of the generations where congressional members have different values and goals for America. We are witness to the old and powerful lobbyists prolonging the inevitable, as they are unwilling to disengage authority. Americans over age 50, must transition power and influence, as it is now time for our children to become accountable and take the lead. Americans understand that cooperation is an essential interaction for our species. As a fifty four year old only mom and working professional, it is time for me to begin my new role as advisor. I reflect on a band from my youth that has begun the transformation. The band Journey has replaced their lead vocal with a passionate young Filipino singer, Arnel Pineda. Congressional leadership must also begin this inevitable process. What a legacy for the originating band members to transition honorably and mentor their replacements. The changeover in band members will ensure that their music will endure for the young and old to enjoy. In 2012, independent voters will be very selective and identify leaders who will explore new ideas, and to seek out opportunities that will lift America from rehab. Leaders must respectfully communicate a plan that will re-invent America the Beautiful. Don’t stop believing.

Obama's delusional dream world address. He has offered NOTHING which would actually reduce the deficits, but has whined incessantly for more and more taxes to be sucked into the black hole of a broken system. He has not faced reality at all, but its utterly predictable from this sophomoric, under qualified, socialist.. In addition, he piles on a good deal of total lying rubbish,, while blaming everyone else.. The way he pompously purports to speak for the "American people" where his approval is well below 50% is nauseating. As he has shown in the past, telling the truth is well beyond his scope.

Yes, let's have all Americans united, and demand that the 45% of Americans that pay no tax, give their fair share,10%. Let's demand that we find the employers of the 15 million illegal aliens taking jobs from American citizens. Let's demand that all who accept assistance from SSI Medicaid be drug tested. Secure our open borders and stop giving foreign aid to countries that hate us. And bring all our troops home and stop all nation building around the world. that would be a good start..

Yeah, listened to it. Sounded like a standard campaign stump speech. Why does he keep going back to the deal that is simply NOT GOING TO PASS? Politico had an article last week that was about how Obama rolled the GOP in the deficit talks. Want to re-evaluate that one?

why don't you cons own up for your share of this dept you caused the biggest part of it. The rich ended up with the lions share of the money that should have been spent on wars and such instead of private jets and corparations that pay nothing. you cons put us in this mess but you are to coward to own up as usual.